pacman::p_load(sf, tidyverse, funModeling, blorr, corrplot, ggpubr, spdep, GWmodel, tmap, skimr, caret)In-class Exercise 5: Geographically Weighted Logistic Regression (GWLR) and Application
Overview
In this in-class exercise, I utilized the following Geographical Weighted Logistic Regression (GWLR) algorithm:
Weighting functions (kernel)
Weighting schemes
Bandwidth
Getting Started
Setting the Scene
To build an explanatory model to discover factor affecting water point status in Osun State, Nigeria (one of the LGAs with the highest percentage of non-functional waterpoints, over 40% which is more than the national average)
Study area: Orun State, Nigeria
Data sets:
Osun.rds contains LGAs boundaries of sun State. It is in sf polygon data frame, and
Osun_ wp_sf.rds contained water points within Osun State. It is in sf point data frame.
Model Variables
Dependent variable: Water point status (i.e. functional/non-functional)
Independent variables:
distance_to_primary_road,
distance_to_secondary_road,
distance_to_tertiary_road,
distance_to_city,
distance_to_town,
water_point_population,
local_population_1km,
usage_capacity,
is_urban,
water source clean
Note: All variables are continuous, except for the last 3 variables (categorical).
Setting the Analytical Tools
The code chunk below installs and loads the following R packages:
sf
tidyverse
funModeling
corrplot
ggpubr
sf
spdep
GWmodel
tmap
New packages:
caret(short for Classification And REgression Training) is a set of functions that attempt to streamline the process for creating predictive models. The package contains tools for: data splitting, pre-processing, feature selection, model tuning using resampling, variable importance estimation etc.- skimr provides summary statistics about variables in data frames, tibbles, data tables and factors. It is opinionated in its defaults, but easy to modify. In base R, the most similar functions are
summary()for factors and data frames andfivenum()for numeric factors. - blorr offers tools for building and validating binary logistic regression models.
Importing the Analytical data
Osun <- read_rds("rds/Osun.rds")
Osun_wp_sf <- read_rds("rds/Osun_wp_sf.rds")Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA)
The code chunk below uses freq() to see the breakdown of the ‘status’ column by functional and non-functional waterpoints, represented by ‘True’ and ‘False’ respectively.
Osun_wp_sf %>%
freq(input = 'status')Warning: The `<scale>` argument of `guides()` cannot be `FALSE`. Use "none" instead as
of ggplot2 3.3.4.
ℹ The deprecated feature was likely used in the funModeling package.
Please report the issue at <https://github.com/pablo14/funModeling/issues>.
status frequency percentage cumulative_perc
1 TRUE 2642 55.5 55.5
2 FALSE 2118 44.5 100.0Importing Nigeria LGA level boundary
The code chunk below plots the status of the waterpoints on the Nigeria LGA level map:
tmap_mode("view")tmap mode set to interactive viewingtm_shape(Osun)+
# tmap_options(check.and.fix = TRUE)+
tm_polygons(alpha=0.4)+
tm_shape(Osun_wp_sf)+
tm_dots(col="status",
alpha = 0.6)+
tm_view(set.zoom.limits = c(9,12))Observation: From the map above, we can see that both functional and non-functional waterpoints are quite evenly scattered across LGAs in Nigeria. To understand the logical relationship between status of waterpoints and the LGAs, we can do further analysis on different data variables available.
Summary Statistics using skimr
The code chunk below generates summary statistics with skim() of the skimr package:
Osun_wp_sf %>%
skim()Warning: Couldn't find skimmers for class: sfc_POINT, sfc; No user-defined `sfl`
provided. Falling back to `character`.| Name | Piped data |
| Number of rows | 4760 |
| Number of columns | 75 |
| _______________________ | |
| Column type frequency: | |
| character | 47 |
| logical | 5 |
| numeric | 23 |
| ________________________ | |
| Group variables | None |
Variable type: character
| skim_variable | n_missing | complete_rate | min | max | empty | n_unique | whitespace |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| source | 0 | 1.00 | 5 | 44 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| report_date | 0 | 1.00 | 22 | 22 | 0 | 42 | 0 |
| status_id | 0 | 1.00 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| water_source_clean | 0 | 1.00 | 8 | 22 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| water_source_category | 0 | 1.00 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| water_tech_clean | 24 | 0.99 | 9 | 23 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| water_tech_category | 24 | 0.99 | 9 | 15 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| facility_type | 0 | 1.00 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| clean_country_name | 0 | 1.00 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| clean_adm1 | 0 | 1.00 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 0 |
| clean_adm2 | 0 | 1.00 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 35 | 0 |
| clean_adm3 | 4760 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| clean_adm4 | 4760 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| installer | 4760 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| management_clean | 1573 | 0.67 | 5 | 37 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
| status_clean | 0 | 1.00 | 9 | 32 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
| pay | 0 | 1.00 | 2 | 39 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
| fecal_coliform_presence | 4760 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| subjective_quality | 0 | 1.00 | 18 | 20 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| activity_id | 4757 | 0.00 | 36 | 36 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| scheme_id | 4760 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| wpdx_id | 0 | 1.00 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 4760 | 0 |
| notes | 0 | 1.00 | 2 | 96 | 0 | 3502 | 0 |
| orig_lnk | 4757 | 0.00 | 84 | 84 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| photo_lnk | 41 | 0.99 | 84 | 84 | 0 | 4719 | 0 |
| country_id | 0 | 1.00 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| data_lnk | 0 | 1.00 | 79 | 96 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| water_point_history | 0 | 1.00 | 142 | 834 | 0 | 4750 | 0 |
| clean_country_id | 0 | 1.00 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| country_name | 0 | 1.00 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| water_source | 0 | 1.00 | 8 | 30 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| water_tech | 0 | 1.00 | 5 | 37 | 0 | 20 | 0 |
| adm2 | 0 | 1.00 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 33 | 0 |
| adm3 | 4760 | 0.00 | NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| management | 1573 | 0.67 | 5 | 47 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
| adm1 | 0 | 1.00 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| New Georeferenced Column | 0 | 1.00 | 16 | 35 | 0 | 4760 | 0 |
| lat_lon_deg | 0 | 1.00 | 13 | 32 | 0 | 4760 | 0 |
| public_data_source | 0 | 1.00 | 84 | 102 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| converted | 0 | 1.00 | 53 | 53 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| created_timestamp | 0 | 1.00 | 22 | 22 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| updated_timestamp | 0 | 1.00 | 22 | 22 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Geometry | 0 | 1.00 | 33 | 37 | 0 | 4760 | 0 |
| ADM2_EN | 0 | 1.00 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 30 | 0 |
| ADM2_PCODE | 0 | 1.00 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 30 | 0 |
| ADM1_EN | 0 | 1.00 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| ADM1_PCODE | 0 | 1.00 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Variable type: logical
| skim_variable | n_missing | complete_rate | mean | count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rehab_year | 4760 | 0 | NaN | : |
| rehabilitator | 4760 | 0 | NaN | : |
| is_urban | 0 | 1 | 0.39 | FAL: 2884, TRU: 1876 |
| latest_record | 0 | 1 | 1.00 | TRU: 4760 |
| status | 0 | 1 | 0.56 | TRU: 2642, FAL: 2118 |
Variable type: numeric
| skim_variable | n_missing | complete_rate | mean | sd | p0 | p25 | p50 | p75 | p100 | hist |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| row_id | 0 | 1.00 | 68550.48 | 10216.94 | 49601.00 | 66874.75 | 68244.50 | 69562.25 | 471319.00 | ▇▁▁▁▁ |
| lat_deg | 0 | 1.00 | 7.68 | 0.22 | 7.06 | 7.51 | 7.71 | 7.88 | 8.06 | ▁▂▇▇▇ |
| lon_deg | 0 | 1.00 | 4.54 | 0.21 | 4.08 | 4.36 | 4.56 | 4.71 | 5.06 | ▃▆▇▇▂ |
| install_year | 1144 | 0.76 | 2008.63 | 6.04 | 1917.00 | 2006.00 | 2010.00 | 2013.00 | 2015.00 | ▁▁▁▁▇ |
| fecal_coliform_value | 4760 | 0.00 | NaN | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| distance_to_primary_road | 0 | 1.00 | 5021.53 | 5648.34 | 0.01 | 719.36 | 2972.78 | 7314.73 | 26909.86 | ▇▂▁▁▁ |
| distance_to_secondary_road | 0 | 1.00 | 3750.47 | 3938.63 | 0.15 | 460.90 | 2554.25 | 5791.94 | 19559.48 | ▇▃▁▁▁ |
| distance_to_tertiary_road | 0 | 1.00 | 1259.28 | 1680.04 | 0.02 | 121.25 | 521.77 | 1834.42 | 10966.27 | ▇▂▁▁▁ |
| distance_to_city | 0 | 1.00 | 16663.99 | 10960.82 | 53.05 | 7930.75 | 15030.41 | 24255.75 | 47934.34 | ▇▇▆▃▁ |
| distance_to_town | 0 | 1.00 | 16726.59 | 12452.65 | 30.00 | 6876.92 | 12204.53 | 27739.46 | 44020.64 | ▇▅▃▃▂ |
| rehab_priority | 2654 | 0.44 | 489.33 | 1658.81 | 0.00 | 7.00 | 91.50 | 376.25 | 29697.00 | ▇▁▁▁▁ |
| water_point_population | 4 | 1.00 | 513.58 | 1458.92 | 0.00 | 14.00 | 119.00 | 433.25 | 29697.00 | ▇▁▁▁▁ |
| local_population_1km | 4 | 1.00 | 2727.16 | 4189.46 | 0.00 | 176.00 | 1032.00 | 3717.00 | 36118.00 | ▇▁▁▁▁ |
| crucialness_score | 798 | 0.83 | 0.26 | 0.28 | 0.00 | 0.07 | 0.15 | 0.35 | 1.00 | ▇▃▁▁▁ |
| pressure_score | 798 | 0.83 | 1.46 | 4.16 | 0.00 | 0.12 | 0.41 | 1.24 | 93.69 | ▇▁▁▁▁ |
| usage_capacity | 0 | 1.00 | 560.74 | 338.46 | 300.00 | 300.00 | 300.00 | 1000.00 | 1000.00 | ▇▁▁▁▅ |
| days_since_report | 0 | 1.00 | 2692.69 | 41.92 | 1483.00 | 2688.00 | 2693.00 | 2700.00 | 4645.00 | ▁▇▁▁▁ |
| staleness_score | 0 | 1.00 | 42.80 | 0.58 | 23.13 | 42.70 | 42.79 | 42.86 | 62.66 | ▁▁▇▁▁ |
| location_id | 0 | 1.00 | 235865.49 | 6657.60 | 23741.00 | 230638.75 | 236199.50 | 240061.25 | 267454.00 | ▁▁▁▁▇ |
| cluster_size | 0 | 1.00 | 1.05 | 0.25 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 4.00 | ▇▁▁▁▁ |
| lat_deg_original | 4760 | 0.00 | NaN | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| lon_deg_original | 4760 | 0.00 | NaN | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| count | 0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ▁▁▇▁▁ |
Observation: From the results above, we can see that install_year and fecal_coliform_value have excessive number of missing values, thus should not be used in our analysis to prevent data loss.
- Note to think of extent of data loss: number of loss in comparison to total number of data points
The code chunk below is to exclude all missing values + change data type into factor:
Osun_wp_sf_clean <- Osun_wp_sf %>%
filter_at(vars(status,
distance_to_primary_road,
distance_to_secondary_road,
distance_to_tertiary_road,
distance_to_city,
distance_to_town,
water_point_population,
local_population_1km,
usage_capacity,
is_urban,
water_source_clean),
all_vars(!is.na(.))) %>%
mutate(usage_capacity = as.factor(usage_capacity))Note: usage_capacity is no longer numeric (assume to be continuous) in nature and has become a factor. Osun_wp_sf_clean dataset has 4 less records than Osun_wp_sf.
Correlation Analysis
The code chunk below drops irrelevant data columns:
Osun_wp <- Osun_wp_sf_clean %>%
select(c(7,35:39,42:43,46:47,57)) %>%
st_set_geometry(NULL)
# OR st_drop_geometry()The code chunk below takes all numerical fields to do correlation:
cluster_vars.cor = cor(
Osun_wp[,2:7])
corrplot.mixed(cluster_vars.cor,
lower = "ellipse",
upper = "number",
tl.pos = "lt",
diag = "l",
tl.col = "black")
Observation: From the results above, there are no variables that are highly correlated (>=0.8). Thus, there is no sign of multi-collinearity between these variables.
Building a Logistic Regression Model
glm of R is used to calibrate a logistic regression for the water point status.
model <- glm(status ~ distance_to_primary_road +
distance_to_secondary_road +
distance_to_tertiary_road +
distance_to_city +
distance_to_town +
is_urban +
usage_capacity +
water_source_clean +
water_point_population +
local_population_1km,
data = Osun_wp_sf_clean,
family = binomial(link = "logit"))Instead of using a typical R report, blr_regress() of blorr package is used.
blr_regress(model) Model Overview
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Set Resp Var Obs. Df. Model Df. Residual Convergence
------------------------------------------------------------------------
data status 4756 4755 4744 TRUE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response Summary
--------------------------------------------------------
Outcome Frequency Outcome Frequency
--------------------------------------------------------
0 2114 1 2642
--------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Likelihood Estimates
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter DF Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Intercept) 1 0.3887 0.1124 3.4588 5e-04
distance_to_primary_road 1 0.0000 0.0000 -0.7153 0.4744
distance_to_secondary_road 1 0.0000 0.0000 -0.5530 0.5802
distance_to_tertiary_road 1 1e-04 0.0000 4.6708 0.0000
distance_to_city 1 0.0000 0.0000 -4.7574 0.0000
distance_to_town 1 0.0000 0.0000 -4.9170 0.0000
is_urbanTRUE 1 -0.2971 0.0819 -3.6294 3e-04
usage_capacity1000 1 -0.6230 0.0697 -8.9366 0.0000
water_source_cleanProtected Shallow Well 1 0.5040 0.0857 5.8783 0.0000
water_source_cleanProtected Spring 1 1.2882 0.4388 2.9359 0.0033
water_point_population 1 -5e-04 0.0000 -11.3686 0.0000
local_population_1km 1 3e-04 0.0000 19.2953 0.0000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Association of Predicted Probabilities and Observed Responses
---------------------------------------------------------------
% Concordant 0.7347 Somers' D 0.4693
% Discordant 0.2653 Gamma 0.4693
% Tied 0.0000 Tau-a 0.2318
Pairs 5585188 c 0.7347
---------------------------------------------------------------From the report above, we can exclude the distance_to_primary_road and distance_to_secondary_road as their p-value > 0.05, so we cannot reject null hypothesis and the test result is not statistically significant.
Model Assessment of Non-Geographically Weighted Logistic Regression Model
The validity of a cut-off (e.g. 0.5) is measured using sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.
Sensitivity: The % of correctly classified events out of all events = TP / (TP + FN)
Specificity: The % of correctly classified non-events out of all non-events = TN / (TN + FP)
Accuracy: The % of correctly classified events out of all events = (TP + TN) / (TP + FP + TN + FN)
Using the code chunk below, we can get the confusion matrix:
blr_confusion_matrix(model, cutoff = 0.5)Confusion Matrix and Statistics
Reference
Prediction FALSE TRUE
0 1301 738
1 813 1904
Accuracy : 0.6739
No Information Rate : 0.4445
Kappa : 0.3373
McNemars's Test P-Value : 0.0602
Sensitivity : 0.7207
Specificity : 0.6154
Pos Pred Value : 0.7008
Neg Pred Value : 0.6381
Prevalence : 0.5555
Detection Rate : 0.4003
Detection Prevalence : 0.5713
Balanced Accuracy : 0.6680
Precision : 0.7008
Recall : 0.7207
'Positive' Class : 1Observation: From the results, we can see that the model gives us an accuracy of 67.4%, which is better than guessing (50%).
The sensitivity and specificity are 72.1% and 61.5% respectively, which shows that the true positives are slightly higher than the true negative prediction rates.
Building Geographically Weighted Logistic Regression
Converting from sf to sp data frame
The code chunk below converts all variables laid out in the Model Variables section from sf dataframe to sp dataframe:
Osun_wp_sp <- Osun_wp_sf_clean %>%
select(c(status,
distance_to_primary_road,
distance_to_secondary_road,
distance_to_tertiary_road,
distance_to_city,
distance_to_town,
water_point_population,
local_population_1km,
usage_capacity,
is_urban,
water_source_clean)) %>%
as_Spatial()
Osun_wp_spclass : SpatialPointsDataFrame
features : 4756
extent : 182502.4, 290751, 340054.1, 450905.3 (xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax)
crs : +proj=tmerc +lat_0=4 +lon_0=8.5 +k=0.99975 +x_0=670553.98 +y_0=0 +a=6378249.145 +rf=293.465 +towgs84=-92,-93,122,0,0,0,0 +units=m +no_defs
variables : 11
names : status, distance_to_primary_road, distance_to_secondary_road, distance_to_tertiary_road, distance_to_city, distance_to_town, water_point_population, local_population_1km, usage_capacity, is_urban, water_source_clean
min values : 0, 0.014461356813335, 0.152195902540837, 0.017815121653488, 53.0461399623541, 30.0019777713073, 0, 0, 1000, 0, Borehole
max values : 1, 26909.8616132094, 19559.4793799085, 10966.2705628969, 47934.343603562, 44020.6393368124, 29697, 36118, 300, 1, Protected Spring Building fixed bandwidth GWR model
The code chunk below computes the distance matrix using ggwr() of the sp package:
bw.fixed <- bw.ggwr(status ~
distance_to_primary_road +
distance_to_secondary_road +
distance_to_tertiary_road +
distance_to_city +
distance_to_town +
is_urban +
usage_capacity +
water_source_clean +
water_point_population +
local_population_1km,
data = Osun_wp_sp,
family = "binomial",
approach = "AIC",
kernel = "gaussian",
adaptive = FALSE,
longlat = FALSE)Take a cup of tea and have a break, it will take a few minutes.
-----A kind suggestion from GWmodel development group
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 95768.67 )
=========================
0 -2889
1 -2836
2 -2830
3 -2829
4 -2829
5 -2829
Fixed bandwidth: 95768.67 AICc value: 5684.357
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 59200.13 )
=========================
0 -2875
1 -2818
2 -2810
3 -2808
4 -2808
5 -2808
Fixed bandwidth: 59200.13 AICc value: 5646.785
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 36599.53 )
=========================
0 -2847
1 -2781
2 -2768
3 -2765
4 -2765
5 -2765
6 -2765
Fixed bandwidth: 36599.53 AICc value: 5575.148
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 22631.59 )
=========================
0 -2798
1 -2719
2 -2698
3 -2693
4 -2693
5 -2693
6 -2693
Fixed bandwidth: 22631.59 AICc value: 5466.883
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 13998.93 )
=========================
0 -2720
1 -2622
2 -2590
3 -2581
4 -2580
5 -2580
6 -2580
7 -2580
Fixed bandwidth: 13998.93 AICc value: 5324.578
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 8663.649 )
=========================
0 -2601
1 -2476
2 -2431
3 -2419
4 -2417
5 -2417
6 -2417
7 -2417
Fixed bandwidth: 8663.649 AICc value: 5163.61
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 5366.266 )
=========================
0 -2436
1 -2268
2 -2194
3 -2167
4 -2161
5 -2161
6 -2161
7 -2161
8 -2161
9 -2161
Fixed bandwidth: 5366.266 AICc value: 4990.587
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 3328.371 )
=========================
0 -2157
1 -1922
2 -1802
3 -1739
4 -1713
5 -1713
Fixed bandwidth: 3328.371 AICc value: 4798.288
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2068.882 )
=========================
0 -1751
1 -1421
2 -1238
3 -1133
4 -1084
5 -1084
Fixed bandwidth: 2068.882 AICc value: 4837.017
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 4106.777 )
=========================
0 -2297
1 -2095
2 -1997
3 -1951
4 -1938
5 -1936
6 -1936
7 -1936
8 -1936
Fixed bandwidth: 4106.777 AICc value: 4873.161
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2847.289 )
=========================
0 -2036
1 -1771
2 -1633
3 -1558
4 -1525
5 -1525
Fixed bandwidth: 2847.289 AICc value: 4768.192
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2549.964 )
=========================
0 -1941
1 -1655
2 -1503
3 -1417
4 -1378
5 -1378
Fixed bandwidth: 2549.964 AICc value: 4762.212
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2366.207 )
=========================
0 -1874
1 -1573
2 -1410
3 -1316
4 -1274
5 -1274
Fixed bandwidth: 2366.207 AICc value: 4773.081
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2663.532 )
=========================
0 -1979
1 -1702
2 -1555
3 -1474
4 -1438
5 -1438
Fixed bandwidth: 2663.532 AICc value: 4762.568
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2479.775 )
=========================
0 -1917
1 -1625
2 -1468
3 -1380
4 -1339
5 -1339
Fixed bandwidth: 2479.775 AICc value: 4764.294
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2593.343 )
=========================
0 -1956
1 -1674
2 -1523
3 -1439
4 -1401
5 -1401
Fixed bandwidth: 2593.343 AICc value: 4761.813
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2620.153 )
=========================
0 -1965
1 -1685
2 -1536
3 -1453
4 -1415
5 -1415
Fixed bandwidth: 2620.153 AICc value: 4761.89
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2576.774 )
=========================
0 -1950
1 -1667
2 -1515
3 -1431
4 -1393
5 -1393
Fixed bandwidth: 2576.774 AICc value: 4761.889
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2603.584 )
=========================
0 -1960
1 -1678
2 -1528
3 -1445
4 -1407
5 -1407
Fixed bandwidth: 2603.584 AICc value: 4761.813
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2609.913 )
=========================
0 -1962
1 -1680
2 -1531
3 -1448
4 -1410
5 -1410
Fixed bandwidth: 2609.913 AICc value: 4761.831
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2599.672 )
=========================
0 -1958
1 -1676
2 -1526
3 -1443
4 -1405
5 -1405
Fixed bandwidth: 2599.672 AICc value: 4761.809
Iteration Log-Likelihood:(With bandwidth: 2597.255 )
=========================
0 -1957
1 -1675
2 -1525
3 -1441
4 -1403
5 -1403
Fixed bandwidth: 2597.255 AICc value: 4761.809 bw.fixed[1] 2599.672We need to remove 2 statistically insignificant data columns (p-value > 0.05): distance_to_primary_road and distance_to_secondary_road
gwlr.fixed <- ggwr.basic(status ~
distance_to_tertiary_road +
distance_to_city +
distance_to_town +
is_urban +
usage_capacity +
water_source_clean +
water_point_population +
local_population_1km,
data = Osun_wp_sp,
bw = bw.fixed,
family = "binomial",
kernel = "gaussian",
adaptive = FALSE,
longlat = FALSE) Iteration Log-Likelihood
=========================
0 -2035
1 -1773
2 -1636
3 -1562
4 -1531
5 -1531 gwlr.fixed ***********************************************************************
* Package GWmodel *
***********************************************************************
Program starts at: 2022-12-18 01:13:22
Call:
ggwr.basic(formula = status ~ distance_to_tertiary_road + distance_to_city +
distance_to_town + is_urban + usage_capacity + water_source_clean +
water_point_population + local_population_1km, data = Osun_wp_sp,
bw = bw.fixed, family = "binomial", kernel = "gaussian",
adaptive = FALSE, longlat = FALSE)
Dependent (y) variable: status
Independent variables: distance_to_tertiary_road distance_to_city distance_to_town is_urban usage_capacity water_source_clean water_point_population local_population_1km
Number of data points: 4756
Used family: binomial
***********************************************************************
* Results of Generalized linear Regression *
***********************************************************************
Call:
NULL
Deviance Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-129.368 -1.750 1.074 1.742 34.126
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
Intercept 3.540e-01 1.055e-01 3.354 0.000796
distance_to_tertiary_road 1.001e-04 2.040e-05 4.910 9.13e-07
distance_to_city -1.764e-05 3.391e-06 -5.202 1.97e-07
distance_to_town -1.544e-05 2.825e-06 -5.466 4.60e-08
is_urbanTRUE -2.667e-01 7.474e-02 -3.569 0.000358
usage_capacity1000 -6.206e-01 6.966e-02 -8.908 < 2e-16
water_source_cleanProtected Shallow Well 4.947e-01 8.496e-02 5.823 5.79e-09
water_source_cleanProtected Spring 1.279e+00 4.384e-01 2.917 0.003530
water_point_population -5.098e-04 4.476e-05 -11.390 < 2e-16
local_population_1km 3.452e-04 1.779e-05 19.407 < 2e-16
Intercept ***
distance_to_tertiary_road ***
distance_to_city ***
distance_to_town ***
is_urbanTRUE ***
usage_capacity1000 ***
water_source_cleanProtected Shallow Well ***
water_source_cleanProtected Spring **
water_point_population ***
local_population_1km ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
(Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
Null deviance: 6534.5 on 4755 degrees of freedom
Residual deviance: 5688.9 on 4746 degrees of freedom
AIC: 5708.9
Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 5
AICc: 5708.923
Pseudo R-square value: 0.129406
***********************************************************************
* Results of Geographically Weighted Regression *
***********************************************************************
*********************Model calibration information*********************
Kernel function: gaussian
Fixed bandwidth: 2599.672
Regression points: the same locations as observations are used.
Distance metric: A distance matrix is specified for this model calibration.
************Summary of Generalized GWR coefficient estimates:**********
Min. 1st Qu. Median
Intercept -2.7666e+02 -3.9783e+00 2.9182e+00
distance_to_tertiary_road -1.9928e-02 -3.5892e-04 8.9443e-05
distance_to_city -3.0660e-02 -5.6112e-04 -1.0323e-04
distance_to_town -3.4651e-03 -4.3065e-04 -1.2343e-04
is_urbanTRUE -2.9760e+02 -3.1713e+00 -1.4841e+00
usage_capacity1000 -4.5108e+01 -1.0254e+00 -3.8922e-01
water_source_cleanProtected.Shallow.Well -1.0341e+02 -4.2500e-01 5.9754e-01
water_source_cleanProtected.Spring -7.8506e+02 -5.4098e+00 2.5517e+00
water_point_population -3.5392e-02 -2.0844e-03 -1.1257e-03
local_population_1km -5.7871e-02 4.0301e-04 9.9909e-04
3rd Qu. Max.
Intercept 1.0630e+01 1090.6880
distance_to_tertiary_road 5.3807e-04 0.0139
distance_to_city 1.2644e-04 0.0128
distance_to_town 2.2117e-04 0.0160
is_urbanTRUE 8.9563e-01 737.2336
usage_capacity1000 3.5141e-01 5.8909
water_source_cleanProtected.Shallow.Well 1.8017e+00 52.2295
water_source_cleanProtected.Spring 6.5109e+00 151.6551
water_point_population 1.9314e-04 0.0567
local_population_1km 1.6812e-03 0.0293
************************Diagnostic information*************************
Number of data points: 4756
GW Deviance: 3053.711
AIC : 4500.019
AICc : 4759.787
Pseudo R-square value: 0.532677
***********************************************************************
Program stops at: 2022-12-18 01:13:55 From the results above, AIC reduced from 5708.9 (non-geographically weighted regression model) to 4500.0 (geographically weighted regression model), thus there was an improvement in the regression model.
Model Assessment of Geographically Weighted Logistic Regression Model
Converting SDF into sf data.frame
To assess the performance of gwlr, firslty, we will convert the SDF object in as dataframe by using the code chunk below:
gwr.fixed <- as.data.frame(gwlr.fixed$SDF)Next, we will be labelling yhat values greater or equal to 0.5 into 1 and else 0. The result of the logic comparison operation will be saved into a field called most.
gwr.fixed <- gwr.fixed %>%
mutate(most = ifelse(
gwr.fixed$yhat >= 0.5,T,F))Model Assessment
Originally, y data column is logi data while yhat is numerical data. Thus, we need to use as.factor() to convert both columns to factors for comparison.
gwr.fixed$y <-as.factor(gwr.fixed$y)
gwr.fixed$most <- as.factor(gwr.fixed$most)
CM <- confusionMatrix(data=gwr.fixed$most, reference = gwr.fixed$y)
CMConfusion Matrix and Statistics
Reference
Prediction FALSE TRUE
FALSE 1792 302
TRUE 322 2340
Accuracy : 0.8688
95% CI : (0.8589, 0.8783)
No Information Rate : 0.5555
P-Value [Acc > NIR] : <2e-16
Kappa : 0.7341
Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 0.4469
Sensitivity : 0.8477
Specificity : 0.8857
Pos Pred Value : 0.8558
Neg Pred Value : 0.8790
Prevalence : 0.4445
Detection Rate : 0.3768
Detection Prevalence : 0.4403
Balanced Accuracy : 0.8667
'Positive' Class : FALSE
Observation: From the results above, we can see improvement in the accuracy (from 67.4% to 86.9%), as a result of improvements in both sensitivity (from 72.1% to 84.8%) and specificity (from 61.5% to 88.6%).
Thus, geographically weighted is a better model, given the improvement in accuracy and increase in true negative (i.e. specificity) which allows for better explanation of non-functional waterpoint. To better manage the waterpoints, we need to look a local strategy for specific LGAs (in this case, we are looking at Osun).
Visualising gwLR
Osun_wp_sf_selected <- Osun_wp_sf_clean %>%
select(c(ADM2_EN, ADM2_PCODE,
ADM1_EN, ADM1_PCODE,
status))gwr_sf.fixed <- cbind(Osun_wp_sf_selected, gwr.fixed)Visualising coefficient estimates
The code chunks below is used to create an interactive point symbol map.
tmap_mode("view")tmap mode set to interactive viewingprob_T <- tm_shape(Osun)+
tm_polygons(alpha = 0.1)+
tm_shape(gwr_sf.fixed) +
tm_dots(col = "yhat",
border.col = "gray60",
border.lwd = 1)+
tm_view(set.zoom.limits = c(8,14))
prob_Ttertiary_TV <- tm_shape(Osun) +
tm_polygons(alpha = 0.1) +
tm_shape(gwr_sf.fixed) +
tm_dots(col = "distance_to_tertiary_road_TV",
border.col = "gray60",
border.lwd = 1) +
tm_view(set.zoom.limits = c(8,14))
tertiary_TVVariable(s) "distance_to_tertiary_road_TV" contains positive and negative values, so midpoint is set to 0. Set midpoint = NA to show the full spectrum of the color palette.